Cited by 51Forest Management and PolicyConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementForest ecology and management

Predicting pan-tropical climate change induced forest stock gains and losses – implications for REDD

Open access
Gumpenberger, Marlies, Vohland, Katrin, Heyder, Ursula, Poulter, Benjamin, Macey, Kirsten, Rammig, Anja, Popp, Alexander, Cramer, Wolfgang·2010·Environmental Research Letters

Abstract

Deforestation is a major threat to tropical forests worldwide, contributing up to one-fifth of global carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Despite protection efforts, deforestation of tropical forests has continued in recent years. Providing incentives to reducing deforestation has been proposed in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Bali negotiations in 2007 to decelerate emissions from deforestation (REDD—reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation). A number of methodological issues such as ensuring permanence, establishing reference emissions levels that do not reward business-as-usual and having a measuring, reporting and verification system in place are essential elements in implementing successful REDD schemes. To assess the combined impacts of climate and land-use change on tropical forest carbon stocks in the 21st century, we use a dynamic global vegetation model (LPJ DGVM) driven by five different climate change projections under a given greenhouse gas emission scenario (SRES A2) and two contrasting land-use change scenarios. We find that even under a complete stop of deforestation after the period of the Kyoto Protocol (post-2012) some countries may continue to lose carbon stocks due to climate change. Especially at risk is tropical Latin America, although the presence and magnitude of the risk depends on the climate change scenario. By contrast, strong protection of forests could increase carbon uptake in many tropical countries, due to CO 2 fertilization effects, even under altered climate regimes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1748-9326/5/1/014013

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Forests are a major storage of carbon, so there is an adverse impact when forest carbon is released for the purpose of bioenergy production.

    “Forests are a major storage of carbon [22], so there is an adverse impact when forest carbon is released for the purpose of bioenergy production [23].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. IPCC 2000 Special Report on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry ed R T Watson, I R Noble, B Bolin, N H Ravindranath, D J Verardo and D J Dokken (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) p 377 available at www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/land use/index.php?idp=0
  2. IPCC 2007 Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ed M L Parry, O F Canziani, J P Palutikof, P J van der Linden and C E Hanson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) p 976 available at www.ipcc.ch/ publications and data/ar4/wg2/en/contents.html
  3. IPCC 2007 Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ed S Solomon, D Qin, M Manning, Z Chen, M Marquis, K B Averyt, M Tignor and H L Miller (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) p 996 available at www.ipcc.ch/publications and data/ar4/wg1/en/contents. html

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gumpenberger, M., Vohland, K., Heyder, U., Poulter, B., Macey, K., Rammig, A., Popp, A., & Cramer, W.
Affiliations
  • Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
  • Museum für Naturkunde (DE)
  • Climate Analytics (DE)
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2010-01
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
014013
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007686879
Cited by
51
References
66
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Environmental Research Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DORA WSL (Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Publication Database PIK (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (512464)
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
  • Office of Science
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Forest ecology and management
Keywords
REDD+, climate change impacts on forests, deforestation, land use change, climate change projections, SRES A2 scenario, CO2 fertilization, carbon uptake, tropical Latin America, forest protection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review